The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > LISTEN

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 10-22-2016, 01:33 PM
KevWind KevWind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edge of Wilderness Wyoming
Posts: 11,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbeirnes View Post
As the audio on Youtube is highly compressed and of low quality, any $20 headphones will reproduce everything that is there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbeirnes View Post
Sound Cloud uses a 128kbs stream so again $20 head phones will reproduce everything available.
Unfortunately this may seem like it could be an accurate statement but it is not really completely accurate , considering everything that goes into listening on playback systems and what MP3encoding actually does and does not do. As stated it is actually not automatically nor universally applicable.
It would depend entirely on the actual spec's of said $20 HP's .


Certainly 128 bit is lacking in the total amount information of an uncompressed file, but it still caries the entire dynamic range low to hi and the frequency response of the original file and has enough information to actually fall into "the better the reproduction capability of the playback system the better it will sound" situation.

Which is why even a streamed soundcloud file sounds way better on a good sound system than it does on say earbuds, computer speakers or I would bet any pair of $20 HP's YMMV

Here is an excerpt from Audiophile review

"Many audio enthusiasts describe the effects of MP3 much as they would describe the effects of dubbing audio onto analog tape, which has a deleterious effect on almost every aspect of audio quality (frequency response, dynamic range, signal-to-noise ratio, distortion, etc.). It doesn't work that way. It'd be more useful (although not literally accurate) to think of MP3 and other lossy codecs as introducing random elements. The lower the bitrate (i.e., 128 kbps vs. 256 kbps), the more random elements are introduced, and the lower the audio quality. The frequency response and dynamic range are essentially unchanged, there's just more junk in the signal.

That's because MP3 works not by reducing dynamic range or frequency response, but by discarding data that's less likely to be heard. It breaks an audio sample down into multiple frequency bins; analyzes them to find out sounds that are unlikely to be heard (for example, a 1.1 kHz tone at -20 dBFS adjacent to a 1 kHz tone at -3 dBFS); then reduces or zeroes-out the number of bits used to encode those relatively inaudible tones. You'll still hear that loud -3 dBFS tone in almost all of its original glory, minus or plus the slight level error that MP3 might introduce. Of course, that's a greatly simplified explanation; if you want to dig deeper, try this site."
__________________
" Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." Albert Einstein
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev...


KevWind at Soundcloud

Last edited by KevWind; 10-22-2016 at 01:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-23-2016, 07:41 AM
Herb Hunter Herb Hunter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 18,372
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbeirnes View Post
As the audio on Youtube is highly compressed and of low quality, any $20 headphones will reproduce everything that is there.
Whether I’m listening to a high-resolution, uncompressed recording or a highly compressed, low-resolution one, I want my headphones or speakers to reproduce it accurately. A $20 headphone may reproduce everything in a Youtube soundtrack but it may or may not reproduce it accurately. It might exaggerate the mid-bass frequencies or accentuate higher frequencies or dull the transients.

If I’m looking at high resolution photographs or images made with a flip=phone, I wouldn’t want my glasses to introduce geometric distortion or alter the color balance of the images.

Last edited by Herb Hunter; 10-24-2016 at 12:31 PM. Reason: Typographical mistake
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-23-2016, 09:55 AM
matthewpartrick's Avatar
matthewpartrick matthewpartrick is offline
In flagrante ex-officio
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Key West, FL
Posts: 4,738
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herb Hunter View Post
Whether Iím listening to a high-resolution, uncompressed recording or a highly compressed, low-resolution one, I want my headphones or speakers to reproduce the it accurately. A $20 headphone may reproduce everything in a Youtube soundtrack but it may or may not reproduce it accurately. It might exaggerate the mid-bass frequencies or accentuate higher frequencies or dull the transients.

If Iím looking at high resolution photographs or images made with a flip=phone, I wouldnít want my glasses to introduce geometric distortion or alter the color balance of the images.
(+) 1. I use the same good quality headphones whether I'm listening to YouTube or some crazy hi-res DSD track.
__________________
2009 Martin 000-28ECM
2009 Martin 000-42ECM
2014 Martin 000-45ECM
1930 Martin OM-28
2015 Baranik Meridian
2015 Giacomel Saturno
2017 LeGeyt Parlour

On Deck:
2019 Brondel A2c
2019 Circa OM-18/21
2020 LeGeyt CLM
2020 Marklund 0-21

The Clueless Audiophile demystifying the two channel hi fi audio market for the clueless among us
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > LISTEN

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=